Lawsuits Stack Up Against Apple After News It Slowed Older iPhones
Separate groups of plaintiffs lawyers sued Apple on Thursday in federal courts in California's Northern and Central districts and the Northern District of Illinois.
December 22, 2017 at 02:24 PM
2 minute read
In the wake of news that Apple Inc. is intentionally slowing the processing speeds of some older iPhones, the company has been hit with at least three class action lawsuits filed across the country.
Separate groups of plaintiffs lawyers sued Apple on Thursday in federal courts in California's Northern and Central districts and the Northern District of Illinois.
“Apple's decision to purposefully slowdown or throttle down these devices was undertaken to fraudulently induce consumers to purchase the latest iPhone versions of the iPhone 7, as well as new phones such as the iPhone 8 and iPhone X,” wrote the lawyers in the Illinois complaint.
Apple representatives didn't respond to a request for comment on the lawsuits.
The suits came shortly after Apple officials told tech website TechCrunch on Wednesday that the company installed “a feature” on some older iPhone models that have batteries that can't meet the peak current demands required to operate in cold conditions or when phone batteries have a low charge. The company said its aim was to “smooth out the instantaneous peaks only when needed” in order to avoid unexpected shutdowns of the older phones.
The statement from Apple came after chatter about the older phones' performance on Reddit sparked a Dec. 18 post from the founder of the company behind Geekbench processor testing software. Primate Labs founder John Poole said that iPhones with older batteries exhibited “lower-than-expected” performance in recent tests. Poole concluded that Apple's fix to the sudden shutdown problem in older phones would “cause users to think, 'My phone is slow so I should replace it,' not, 'My phone is slow so I should replace its battery.'”
The three lawsuits bring a variety of claims, including that Apple fraudulently concealed problems with batteries in the older phones, that its moves violated state consumer protection laws, and, in the Central District of California case, that the company trespassed onto consumers phones by interfering with the speed of their devices.
“Apple had the choice to inform consumers and failed to do so,” said James Vlahakis of Sulaiman Law Group, lead counsel in the Illinois case. “Here clearly Apple knew what they were doing and didn't tell anybody. It's that simple.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDog Gone It, Target: Provider of Retailer's Mascot Dog Sues Over Contract Cancellation
4 minute readRead the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readOpenAI, NYTimes Counsel Quarrel Over Erased OpenAI Training Data
Meta Seeks Declaratory Judgment in VR Eyewear Tech Patent Infringement Case
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250